An open letter to the Scottsdale Unified School District

Education should focus on the students and teachers.

It is that simple. But, last week, the Scottsdale Unified School District (SUSD), in the +City of Scottsdale (Official), asked teachers to vote for a proposed rate cut in a manner that disgustingly resembles that of +The Hunger Games. It is unfortunate that time and time again, the SUSD has disregarded the factors that make education great.

According to the teachers, the SUSD gave them two choices:

1. Keep the bonuses and pay at the current level, but cut a number of teachers. 
2. Lower the bonuses and pay from the current level and make no cuts. 

That is pitting teacher against teacher. Why should one employee's contract affect another's? One person's job should not be tied to that of another. That is completely unethical.

To make matters worse, the SUSD decided to circumvent employer-union processes, among others, and skip directly to asking the teachers. While I hold my own opinions regarding labor unions, processes are in place for a reason. The SUSD should understand that and adhere to those specific policies, especially when they have so many abnormal, arduous and special policies and processes of their own that they force students and teachers to follow.

The superintendent, in his speech to the staff, even likened this situation with that of the September 11 terrorist attacks and the recent Boston Marathon bombings, in the sense that it was a community "coming together." Not only is the situation completely unlike either of the examples, but it is an exaggeration of the situation that tries to capture emotion and use it to manipulate people.

Teachers abstained from voting, as they should. Of the 1,570 teachers in the SUSD, only 884 cast their votes. The District needed 70% (or 1,110 votes) of all teachers to approve option 2 to proceed with their proposal.

And that has led to headlines such as +azcentral.com's "Scottsdale teachers won't give up Prop 301 funds to save jobs." It is sad that at the low pay our teachers already receive, and the immoral procedure SUSD chose to use in this instance, as in many others, the AZCentral and other media continue to choose to characterize teachers as greedy.

The article makes no mention of the unethical treatment and method the District went about the process and the long history of irresponsible spending that characterizes and plagues my District.

Last week, teachers protested before and after school on the issue.

Teachers emphasize that they would be willing to take a reduction in their paychecks so as to help save other teachers, who are also their friends. It is not about that -- it is a bigger fight. What they are unwilling to do is be treated like subjects, without respect, time and time again, and asked to determine the fate of others based on the fate of their own. They are unwilling to continue seeing the District ruin education and the future. They want to take a stance against things they see as unethical and irresponsible on the part of the District.

Well, I do too.

I am sad to say this, but, even as a senior who will not be coming back next year, I am sick and tired of the SUSD's gross practices to make cuts that hurt students and teachers, while District officials carelessly and inappropriately waste money and give lame excuses portraying their solutions as the only practical methods.

I have protested SUSD's poor judgement and management in the past, as have many students and teachers. In the past couple years, they have changed start times, modified bus schedules, cut important school programs, packed more students into classrooms, axed teachers and more.

We understand that it is a tough economy. But almost every cut has negatively affected the classroom experience in some way, shape or form, while administrators and management continue to gain more benefits yearly that stress the budget.

Every year, the budget is of discussion. Every year, we cannot meet the budget. Every year, the District asks for more and more cuts.

It is time they fix their own problems for the long-term and come up with a viable solution. Top District officials do not need rental cars to drive to the office. Classrooms do not need technology that students and teachers do not use (though the District claims it is entering the 21st Century... with SmartBoards). The District does not need to purchase things that are not necessary, such as Microsoft Office 365, which is not even offered to either students or teachers; it is just there.

Students, teachers and parents should not have to fight to make sure the District keeps both students and teachers a priority. Teachers should not have to spend time fighting for ethical treatment, especially after a day of teaching. Great education should be the focus of the District -- the best teachers teaching the best content in the best environment to produce the best students.

The District clearly does not have the community's interest in mind, and many times makes decisions that it feels are best without asking for the community's opinions, and it is a shame to see one of Arizona's finest school districts go down this path, just like many others across the nation.

Voice your opinion. Tell the SUSD to put students and teachers first: susd.org. Stand with us and tell SUSD that enough is enough.

• Dr. David J. Peterson, Superintendent (djpeterson@susd.org)
• Dr. Jeff Thomas, Associate Superintendent (jeff.thomas@susd.org)
• Mrs. Pam Kirby, President (pkirby@susd.org)
• Mr. Denny Brown, Vice President (dennybrown@susd.org)

Find photos: https://plus.google.com/110054944436884567109/posts/9XP9e1CH41r?utm_source=chrome_ntp_icon&utm_medium=chrome_app&utm_campaign=chrome.

My thoughts regarding BSA's anti-gay policy

Over the past seven years, I have been a member of the +Boy Scouts of America (BSA), one of the largest and most well-known youth organizations in the nation, founded in 1910. In 2012, I became an Eagle Scout. Looking back, I have thoroughly enjoyed my time in the program, which has given me countless challenges, experiences and opportunities; these have all improved and shaped my life.

The Boy Scouts of America, along with other aspects of my background, has also caused me to become an advocate of the most basic of human rights. That is, every individual should be treated equally and is entitled to his or her own opinions (thoughts, morals, values) and the guarantee of the freedoms of assembly, expression, religion and speech, so far as the resulting actions do not impose physical danger or harm to others within society.

Therefore, not surprisingly, I feel strongly in regards to the controversial Boy Scout policy, a national ban on gay members and leaders.

Since BSA's establishment, it has aimed to "prepare young people to make ethical and moral choices over their lifetimes by instilling in them the values of the Scout Oath and Law." As a result of this mission, the BSA won a Supreme Court case in 2000 which upheld its national ban on gays. BSA simply stated that it excluded such members because "homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values it seeks to instill."

However, to me, restricting membership access ultimately betrays the BSA's mission altogether, more so than "homosexual conduct," due to BSA's firm ideology of treating everyone equally, a conclusion I came to throughout my years as a Boy Scout.


Duty to my country and being morally straight.
As a Scout, one promises the following, as part of the Scout Oath:

On my honor I will do my best
To do my duty to God and my country
and to obey the Scout Law;
To help other people at all times;
To keep myself physically strong,
mentally awake, and morally straight.

One phrase sticks out to me in particular: "To do my duty to God and my country." It is my belief that following the Pledge of Allegiance, also something each Scout must know, is the soundest way to fulfill the duties as a citizen for one's country. That very Pledge says:

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. 

In the Scout Handbook, "with liberty and justice for all" is described as "with freedom and fairness for every person in the country - you and every other American." Clearly, doing one's duty to the country involves treating each individual equally and giving each person the same type of access regardless of their individual beliefs, morals and values.

Another phrase is important to me: "morally straight." Think what you may, but the official Scout Handbook states that this means "to be a person of strong character... you should respect and defend the rights of all people." Again, the Scout Handbook alone explicitly states the contrary of the intention of the BSA's anti-gay policy.


The Scout Law.
The Scout Law is "the foundation of Scouting, expressed in just twelve simple points."

A Scout is trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean and reverent.

Quite obviously, there are a couple traits that should immediately be emphasized when discussing the issue of providing equal membership for gay members and leaders. The following traits and summary definitions are per the Scout Handbook.

Friendly - A Scout "offers his friendship to people of all races and nations, and respects them even if their beliefs and customs are different from his own. Accept who you are, too, and celebrate the fact that you don't have to be just like everyone else. Real friends respect the ideas, interests, and talents that make you special.

The Scout Law, as per the Scout Handbook.

Clean - "There's another kind of dirt, though, that can't be scrubbed away. It is the kind that shows up in foul language and harmful thoughts and actions. Swearwords and dirty stories are often used as weapons to ridicule other people and hurt their feelings. The same is true of racial slurs and jokes that make fun of ethnic groups or people with physical or mental limitations. A Scout knows there is no kindness or honor in such tasteless behavior. He avoids it in his own words or deeds."

In these two traits of the Scout Law alone, the Scouting organization (in a perfect world) clearly believes that everyone, regardless of their background, beliefs, origin or race should be fully accepted and treated as an equal. The Scouting organization is violating various parts of the Scout Law by not respecting people of different beliefs and not allowing those people to "accept" themselves.

As a result of the violations of "friendly" and "clean" of the Scout Law, the BSA violates several other traits as well.

Obedience - Obedience must be guided by good judgment. If someone tells you to cheat, steal or do something else you know is wrong, you must say no. Trust your own beliefs and obey your conscience when you know you are right.

Brave - Saving lives is not the only test of bravery. You are brave every time you do what is right in spite of what others might say. You are brave when you speak the truth and when you admit a mistake and apologize for it. And you show true courage when you defend the rights of others.


Personal experience.
Whether it is in my own Troop or at a summer camp, I have had the fortunate opportunity to meet many people, from all walks of life with hundreds of different beliefs on everything. This diversity created a better environment and allowed me to foster and grow. It made me a better person who was more open-minded to the people of this world.

From my personal experience, the ban on gay members and leaders is a policy that is rarely enforced in the lower tiers of Scouting. Not only is it virtually unenforceable, but the majority of the population also realizes the stubbornness of the policy. The world is becoming a more open place, and the BSA should learn to adapt if it wants to survive.


The Boy Scouts of America is an organization that aims to educate youth on values, and making ethical and moral choices based on the values described above. What does this say about the BSA when the organization outlines various values but does not follow through?

It is understandable why the BSA would implement such policies. While it may seem as if it would reduce the amount of unwanted sexual conduct within the BSA, it does not accomplish that at all. On the contrary, it hinders the speed at which the BSA can fulfill their mission. More importantly, the American justice system is proudly known for its "innocent until proven guilty" mantra. Labeling all gay members and leaders automatically as sex offenders is hurtful and immoral.

A good analogy would be travel. Though many terrorist attacks have been associated with people of Middle Eastern descent, those same people do not automatically get banned from traveling, or even restrictions on where they can travel. It is only if they pose a credible threat that they get put on a no-fly list, or arrested at the airport.

Each individual is equal, despite the different beliefs we each have, which ultimately make the world a better place. It is my sincere hope, that in the near future, any boy or man who wants an opportunity to grow and learn in the Boy Scout program will be able to do so without unequal treatment.

What are your thoughts? No matter what your viewpoint, add your voice to the discussion, because it should be heard. Discussion is the best thing possible for progress.

"What the Girls Scouts and the Boy Scouts are trying to teach is important. They're trying to teach kids to be leaders. And the more that we teach people how to accept people for who they are, the more self-confident they'll be and the better leaders they'll become."

A free Windows 8 is the best strategy for Microsoft

To consumers, Microsoft has claimed that Windows 8, released in October 2012, is beautiful, fast and flexible. In the business world, Microsoft knows that its newest operating system is critical for its future and the entire Windows 8 lineup, if it succeeds, will allow Microsoft to stay competitive and relevant in the technology industry crowded by younger companies. That's true, and that is exactly why Microsoft should have launched Windows 8 at the price of "free."


Paid Upgrade, No Thanks.
Currently, Microsoft advertises an upgrade to Windows 8 on the PC to start at $39.99. That price is too steep for the typical PC user, without even mentioning the $69.99 base price for the Pro version at Best Buy. For many who are running Windows 7 or earlier, and are content with their system, Windows 8 will just be another cycle that's insignificant to them.

Instead, back in October, and even now, Microsoft should have sold a Windows 8 upgrade for $0.00. They have the resources to do so. It might make me look crazy, but think about it this way: it's a gateway to other Microsoft products (the rest of the Windows 8 lineup, RT and Phone) and a true introduction to the new Microsoft.

Windows 8 boasts "Live Tiles."

Incentive Needed for Learning Curve.
Technology enthusiasts may understand that Windows 8 actually consists of a traditional PC and mobile ecosystem, all wrapped into one. It may be clear to them that Windows 8 is built for laptops and PC's, Windows 8 RT is built for tablets and Windows Phone is built for smartphones. All three versions have Live Tiles and similar features that show all are truly from one family.

But what about the general public? Many people have no clue, and could care less, what Windows 8 is, much less Windows 8 RT (Surface) and Windows Phone 8. The market is filled with Android and iOS devices that are much more familiar than the Windows 8 interface.

How do Live Tiles even help keep track of what's important in life? How is Windows 8, along with the RT and Phone version, "reinvented around the user?" The new interface scares many people. And, those same people will not want to pay fo something just to have to learn how to do the simplest tasks all over again, especially if nothing is broken the way it is now.

The word "free" speaks volumes. No one likes change, but everyone likes free and new things. The confusion and nerves would disappear if they were somehow exposed to Windows 8, and that's the best way. If Microsoft pushed a free upgrade to existing PC users, who then became accustomed to Windows 8, Live Tiles and all the features that come with it, guess what will happen when they see a Surface tablet or a Windows Phone 8 with Live Tiles the next time they're at an electronic store looking for a tablet or smartphone?

By introducing people to Windows 8 in the PC environment, which Microsoft undoubtedly dominates, more and more people will understand the new Windows brand and interface, in turn spurring sales of the mobile versions of Windows (RT and Phone) because they've been familiarized with it. Microsoft could even have given away free SkyDrive storage, and required download by way of signing up for an Outlook address, further tying in all of Microsoft's properties, in a full-throttle marketing ploy.

This would have done more for Microsoft than what the $39.99 for a Windows 8 upgrade ever will.